Back in February I wrote about IBM and their attempts to throw a spanner in the works for the Open XML used in office 2007
The key bits of the story are
We have launched an on-line petition which we will present to the BSI to show there is support for Open XML. If you think it would be better for Open XML to be approved by ISO please consider signing it
Technorati tags: Microsoft, office, OOXML, ODF, ECMA, IBM, FUD, ISO
As James eloquently described in his post titled " Sign-up for freedom of choice " we're looking for
So, why is it that MS doesn't support OpenDoc and feels the need for a second "standard"?
"Freedom of Choice" vs. Standards...hmmm.
I'm pretty sure this is really all about MS creating their own "open standard" so they can sell their products to customers required to purchse open standard technology, ie; government contracts, without embrassing the existing, already ISO-appoved ISO standard, ODF.
Simple, Opendoc can't support all the things we do in office.
You have a choice to save a graphics as PNG, JPG, or TIFF all of which are ISO standards. You don't have to take away Freedom to have standards.
It would be more accurate to say this was about Microsoft making sure (a) That there are formats to represent what the applications can do. and (b) Those formats are not "reserved for Microsoft"
It's also true that some people are trying move the question for Government from "is the product any good" to "does it comply with a standard" - irrespective of whether the standard is good or bad, and we want to neutarlize that.